Intervening After Violence

Abstract

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

How mothers talk about their relationship with their young sons following intimate partner violence and the implications for intergenerational prevention and systemic intervention

“…Family systems theory offers a more ecologically informed, less linear, understanding of violence within families. This includes an analysis of the function of violence in a particular family, as well as how the complex patterns of communication, narratives and feedback loops perpetuates and maintains violent behaviour between different parts of the system (Sammut Scerri et al, 2017). A recent systematic review found evidence to support the use of family therapy in the reduction of IPV (Stith et al, 2022).…”

“…However the dilemma around families that are managing IPV is, how much can you work with a system that is actively dangerous and where the practitioner has ethical and statutory responsibilities to keep people safe alongside a therapeutic task? Some of the nuances of holding this position are addressed in systemic work that directly addresses IPV (Sammut Scerri et al, 2017) and a fuller discussion of the need for a both/and flexible approach to practice will be elucidated in the implications section. In cases of extreme unpredictability and endangerment however, anything other than functional parenting may be impossible, and professionals are duty bound to act in these circumstances.…”

“…While intrapsychic measures such as these are important in understanding what characteristics and qualities need to be encouraged to enable mothers to represent their child's experience in the context of IPV, they are limited through the lack of systemic focus. The value in a systemic approach to understanding IPV, is in its broader focus, not only on the family dynamics, but on the social, political and economic contexts in which it occurs (Sammut Scerri et al, 2017). While this multi-dimensional, ecological focus can lead to a divergence in views around how best to respond to IPV, it does mean that the inclusion of mother's individual traits can be mitigated through a socio-political perspective, which undermines the development of victim blaming narratives (Morriss, 2018).…”

“…While we attempted to take a broadly systemic focus in our understanding of what these women told us, we have also left an important perspective out of our paper, that of fathers. Recent systemic theory has written about the need to work with parental dyads in the aftermath of IPV, once a cessation of violence has been secured (Sammut Scerri et al, 2017;Lawick and Groen, 2009). This better reflects the clinical reality that these families are often bound by complex bonds that are not easily breakable through state intervention or social engineering, even when professionals or the courts feel that is the safest outcome.…”

“…Suffice to say, their absence from this study is an omission that risks increasing their marginalisation in this area and research asking about their views on their sons in relation to IPV could act as a useful adjunct to this study. The issue of reintegration of fathers to the system once IPV has ceased is delicately handled in the systemic literature (Sammut Scerri et al, 2017), and reflects an important reality, that in spite of our phantasies of ridding the family of the aggressor, these men are still around in the community and so exert influence even in their absence from the home.…”